“People have forgotten this truth,” the fox said. “But you mustn’t forget it. You become responsible forever for what you’ve tamed.”

—–

The Little Prince

===============

“I cannot play with you,” the fox replies. “I am not tamed.”

“What does that mean – to tame?”

“It means to establish ties. To me, you are still nothing more than a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, on your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world…please, tame me!”

“I want to, very much,” the Little Prince replied, “but I have not much time. I have friends to discover, and a great many things to understand.”

“One only understands the things that one tames,” the fox said.

==============

Ok.

Some people aren’t going to like the way I am going to discuss Leadership. Some people will not like the implication behind the word “tame” with regard to employees. Those some people should read before they dismiss the thought. t may just offer a different way of thinking about the responsibility of leadership.

Leaders have a tough job in that you manage skills, people, personalities & overall organizational purpose.

We call it managing, but in reality it is taming. You tame the independent wildness and tame the ability & potential so you can understand it, and it can understand itself, so that eventually there is a mutual progress to play the game as well as it can be played.

Please note that nowhere in there have I suggested “blind obedience.” Taming, in this view, is reaching true understanding so that real personal growth occurs.

That said … in that metaphorical expression of leadership … you own what you tame.

I say that because far too often we leaders & managers view management as something we do for the benefit of the organization and, hopefully, the benefit of the people … but we ‘own’ no responsibility for the individual in terms of actions or who they become — and certainly not ‘forever.’

Some of us view ourselves as shapers in some form or fashion but lean back against the belief we only dent the surface of who and what the person is and will become. We view what we do as possibly taming but within the purview of just a chapter in their lives … not an entire story.

In some ways we do this simply as an act of self-survival. The truth is that investing too much personally into your business; the organization and the employees can … well … kill you.

Okay.

Maybe not literally kill you … but figuratively it can become a daily strain on your psychological health. Many of us, out of pragmatism, eye our relationship with employees as a story with a finite end – be it positive, sad, joyful, disappointing or ambiguous – but it is, in reality, just the end of a chapter.

The story keeps going. Ours and theirs.

And while we may represent only a chapter in a larger narrative … well … we own what we tame. This is an inclusive way of leading & managing. You include yourself in someone’s Life and … well … you own what part you tame.

Uhm.

Of course … this can also swing to the opposite more dangerous side – an exclusive leadership side. This is ‘ownership’, not owning, of what you tame. You don’t become part of them you simply offer a voice to them – I sometimes call this ‘pack mentality leadership’.

These are the leaders who say “on my team <or in other words “mine”> forever.” It is possessive in a non productive way.

“Leave and my wrath is upon you.”

That eader’s attitude? “Not want to be tamed by me? you are “un” whatever it is I stand for.” And this is where exclusive leadership truly rears its ugly head.

There is little vision, there is a lot of ‘features’ in the offering <more money, more jobs, more titles, more wins, more whatever> and therefore the incentives do the work and not any persuasive direction or vision. The ‘pack attitude’ is a means to an end and a vision in and of itself.

—-

“Managers tend to use compensation as a crutch. After all, it is far easier to design an incentive system that will do management’s work than it is to articulate a direction persuasively, develop agreement about goals and problems, and confront difficulties when they arise.”

Michael Beer, Harvard professor of business administration

—–

The features, the actions & behavior of those who belong on this team, are how they speak of unity and teamwork, i.e., “everyone should act this way … but we are the ones who do.”

Or how about this?

“The only important thing is the unification of the people – because the other people don’t mean anything.” <Trump used these words once awhile back> In other words … the only people who truly count are the ones who are in this leader’s team.

Even worse? They use the ‘us versus them’ polarization as a means to suggest “team personality & character” all the while these types of leaders actually do it to create their own power structure. They don’t desire to include anyone else nor do they tend to reach out to others <albeit they make some inclusive noises on occasion> they desire to build a construct where people ask to join <because they should, of course, have to ask> and are not asked to join.

“Excluding leader types” love the ‘us versus them’ aspect. They love being derided and they love opposition. All these things do is solidify the team’s belief they are different & better & know more than the others. The team becomes what represents what is real & right and the leader controls what is real & right. The leader’s people are truly the only people that count and the leader hasn’t tamed ability but rather attitude.

And here is where the ownership of what you tamed hits a dangerous spot.

This leader has tamed an attitude but feels little ownership of the people themselves. Therefore should the leader decide to move on or get tired of whatever it is they are doing at the moment they feel no remorse in leaving people behind <who still harbor the attitude he/she tamed>.

The pack remains, the pack mentality still seethes, but the pack leader is no longer there.

Anyway.

Let me close with some thoughts.

I think it is a healthy thought for every manager & leader to ponder ‘you own what you tame.’ Leadership and leading is never easy and I have the scars to show to prove it.

I found it naturally tempting to build a quasi-pack mentality in my groups as a younger leader & manager. I was, and have always been, a more aggressive business person – I am not fond of status quo and not particularly fond of ‘the safe road.’

I can absolutely state that as a manager you can feed off of the ‘pack mentality’ attitude. It is exhilarating and almost like a drug … and maybe more dangerous … it can feed into a self-belief aspect that can edge upon arrogance and obliviousness to the greater good.

I don’t think I ever fell off the cliff on this but I certainly got a glimpse of the edge. As I gained more experience I saw the danger in doing so <to my team members, to my organization & to myself> and sought to find some balance.

Just remember.

You can tame your people’s ability & attitude in an inclusive & “unearthing skill & talent” way and they, and you, will benefit at the time and in the future <whether you are still working together or not>.

Generally said if the affected person should free himself from materialism or minor important things, thus set his mind over those and hence care about more crucial things, not seldom his own well-being for his plans on particular upcoming events might seriously damage his health, his reputation or the like, thus could cause him more harm than intended before – therefore mind over matter settles the issue in advance by barring the person from dealing with the issue(s) himself.

====

Mind Over Matter Urban Dictionary

———-

Well.

Mind over matter may be one of the most important trite quips in human history.

I will point out that despite its overuse and triteness, the entire concept of ‘getting your head straight’ or ‘getting your head in the game’ is maybe the most important Life & professional advise you will ever get. At its most base level mind over matter has nothing to do with positive thinking nor does it have to do with ‘doing what you are destined to do’ and has everything to do with simply making sure you are mentally prepared for whatever you are going to do or face.

I have written probably a hundred posts about mind over matter without ever directly addressing mind over matter.

Pretty much everything I write about centers on attitude and understanding how to get your mind right so you can get ahead and go do the rights things <as in the things you want to do>.

Mind over matter … well … matters because what you can actually do is often exponentially larger than what your mind thinks you can do. In other words … you need to convince your mind to see your potential. By the way, this does not mean you can do the impossible … it simply means that your head very often underestimates, practically speaking, how much you can matter in actual ‘doing shit’. In other words … you often can do more than your head may see you can do.

Now. That said.

This brings up my only real issue with mind over matter. The positive psychology crap people seem to want to prescribe & apply to mind over matter. The positive psychology implies if you believe something it will happen. Or if you think positive things that good things will happen.

That’s bullshit.

The mind just gets you in the game. You gotta work hard to win the game.

This means that mind over matter is more often than not about happiness or positivity … it is more about recognizing real obstacles & challenges and mentally preparing yourself to deal with it all. Uhm. Recognizing … not actually accept all of it.

Just accept that “it” is there and will be a burden you will carry as you pursue your objective or step out on whatever path you elect to walk toward your vision. And, yes, it is a burden and, yes, you shouldn’t seek to lighten it but rather accept it. In other words … you will quickly discover you need to accept a sense of being uncomfortable. That is the key to the mind part of the mind over matter.

Mind over matter is about getting your head in the right place for the journey. It is not about believing you can do something impossible. In the end this means you recognize the journey is the challenge and the destination is the reward.

Anyway.

Sometimes we think of our bodies and minds as two distinct entities. And in some ways they are. But in order to maximize your potential and fulfill your purpose <which is more often than not inspired by the mind> you need to enable a more intertwined you – align the body & the mind. Researchers have certainly found evidence that the brain has a distinct power to manipulate the body’s physiology. This means if you get everything aligned in the ‘mind over matter’ that the mind/body connection can work in your favor … or against you … depending on your attitude and your ability to manage your mind.

Suffice it to say that believing in yourself is all about self-esteem and affects self-actualization <Maslow stuff>.

And mind over matter is believing you are prepared to face whatever believing in yourself throws at you.

Simplistically … you either believe you can do something or you don’t.

I believe it was Plato who wrote that the body can only move when pushed by others or when it is propelled forward by a soul or principle of life within it. This suggests an intertwining between mind, brain, body and soul. That, to me, is the formula of mind over matter in which it is the mind <attitudes> that drives the body <behavior> through the brain <intellect> … and the soul, the passion behind your purpose, is the engine.

It our minds that tie our behavior to the desires, aspirations, aims, ambitions and goals we may have.

I will note that preeminent philosophers have danced on this head of a pin over mind versus matter for centuries.

I, being an everyday schumck, would simply suggest that all that matters is you get your mind in a good place, get your head on straight and work hard. You may not get exactly what you want and get where you want but what will matter is you made the attempt and did your best.

And, frankly, pragmatically & honestly, some of us find out that sometimes your best isn’t good enough. Sometimes the world or the path Life places in front of you is more than what you have.

But … well … you know what? That’s okay. Life gives you hundreds of paths to walk.

Mind over matter opens you up to not only the first path you choose but offers you the resilience to walk another path should you stumble upon the one you first chose. And then another after that if needed.

The “Manifesto of Futurism,” written by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti was published on the front page of the French newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. It proclaimed the desire of the author, and his fellow Futurists, to abandon the past and embrace the future.The point here on the whole concept of a “Futurist” is that their very existence is disdainful of the present.

Anyway.

Should we have an eye to the future? Absolutely.To not do so is to remain stagnant with regard to thinking.

Should we ignore the present? Absolutely not.

If there was ever a time that a Futurist discussed the present … now would be the time.

——–

I still believe the same now as I did then.

Future thinking is purchased in the present. In other words … something existing within the present – most likely some type of behavior … is the future opportunity.

Saying that permits me to say that I believe Futurists … or the label/title … is kind of silly. Suffice it to say looking at trends and envisioning ‘what could be’ doesn’t need a title.

And you certainly cannot earn a living doing it if you get paid for successful futuristic prognostication.

Why?

Because the probability of being right is very very low.

Pretty much every so called futurist <excepting maybe Toffler & Drucker … who never called themselves Futurists> has had an incredibly poor success rate in outlining future trends & behavior <and sometimes even attitudes>.

Moving beyond simply slamming futurists … in my mind … I believe futurists shouldn’t predict … they should inspire thinking <which could beget the future>. This kind of career activity is sort of like NASA.

Unintended innovations and learning.

<insert … ‘yikes’ … and how do you get funding for that these days?>

Speculating on future is all about inspiring thinking … thinking about possibilities and what ifs. And ‘what could be’s.’

This also means not get attached to any one idea or ‘trend’ too much but rather simply embrace the only thing you know for sure … things will change … and embrace change. And if ‘change is a’comin’ you always need to be thinking.

Oh. And not as predicting measured by success or failure.

Well.

Maybe the success objective is simply being in the realm of ‘not being surprised’ <or ‘well, that doesn’t surprise me’>.

Whew.

How’s that for an objective?

I imagine more companies really could use this type of futurist. The difficulty most likely resides in the fact a great thinking ‘futurist’ will typically not bear real tangible results in the present. Their present successes almost always reside in ‘working on ideas which will be used in the future.’

But.

Here is probably where I look at things more differently than any futurist in the world <which means I will never be a card carrying futurist because they will never give me a card> … the future is actually found in the now. Uhm. I mean that future ideas are actually found in the now.

Oh.

And ‘the now’ is not just in thinking … but in doing.

Thinking about what is happening now <attitudes>.

Thinking about what is being done today <behavior>.

Say what?

How can it be futuristic if it is just a derivative of something in the present?

<and feel free and insert a shitload of exclamation points in here if you would like>

Well.

To me real futuristic trending type thinking has to have a slightly pragmatic foundation residing somewhere in the minds of the rising generation. The real … the truly meaningful … behavior shifts occur not within a generation but within transition of generations. Therefore any pie in the sky type thinking has to be made up of some pie that <simplistically> the kids of the present have an interest in eating of. For any future type ideation will live or die not with existing attitude generations but more so in evolving attitude generations.

Now.

To be clear.

People’s attitudes do, and can, evolve as they age and experience things <and they are exposed to new and different attitudes and behavior>. But that isn’t futuristic thinking … that is simply critical mass thinking.

It’s a different ability. That is someone who can look at existing trends and attitudes … mostly looking at those that reside in fractions or in the minority of minds … and figuring out which ones will actually gain enough traction to attain the critical mass to ‘evolve’ the majority of attitudes.

I say that but also suggest that this is often a Sisyphean task.

Attitudes are imprints. They are almost like tattoos. Once established they are almost impossible to remove.

Think about what I would consider the ‘biggies’ of this generation … climate change and marriage <for everyone> … I could also add in equal opportunity.

Please do not get stuck on the examples … just focus on the fact that while I tend to believe the past minority point of views have shifted to a majority more mainstream view acceptance … there still remains a solid steadfast unrelenting minority attitude system in place.

Evolution of attitudes is like glaciers. And they also tend to follow generations … and not single generations.

Early adopter generation transitioning to a vocal minority generation to a majority acceptance generation and ultimately a 4th <and last> generation who not only has the attitudes but behavior is established.

Ok.

Back to what I consider a contrarian point of view on Futurists. I will begin with a quote … and a thought on character.

——-

“People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of their character.“

Ralph Waldo Emerson

——–

Most ‘futurists’ are pompous holier-than-thou vocal nimwhits.
Okay.

That was harsh.

I will take back the nimwhit part.

Most are pretty sharp. But claiming to be a futurist isn’t about claiming to be some intellectual … or some highly intelligent individual … it is more a reflection of character.

Their character is reflected in a view on how you see the world and how you think about the world … and frankly … how you see people. More futurists should be paying more attention to their character than their predictions. I don’t have research on this and because I am not a futurist I am not qualified to predict future behavior … but … I would suggest that if futurists would do a self character attitude tune-up their actual professional behavior would most likely improve <their predictions would improve>.

<note: I am fairly sure I just got kicked off the futurist campus with that thought … especially the nitwit part>

Second <and lastly>.

Futurists have to look forward but seek truth in the young. Their predictions will never come true if there isn’t a pragmatic realistic foundation to be found within the youth. With no traction … the idea … shit … any future type idea … will die.

As I type this it sounds so obvious.

But it seems like futurists and trend identifiers seem to focus on today’s people and gaze at the horizon.

Well.

Paradoxically … future ideas are actually best found in looking backwards … at those who are coming up behind … the young.

Ah.

Shit.

What do I know.

I am not a futurist.

I like to live in the present & make sure I have a future to be doing something in. Uhm. Isn’t that a Futurist?

I interact with behavioral philosophers, economists & scientists all the time. We are all truly in the attitude & behavior business constantly scanning the world for why people do the things they do & try and isolate things which they may be interested in doing in the future. None of them seriously call themselves “futurists.” Most think the term is kind of snake oily & slightly absurd. This leads me to discuss this whole idea of ‘being a Futurist’ through a book called The Futurist <by a guy named Ottmer>.

But before I discuss the book … this overall topic is one of my favorite. Ahhhhhhhhhhhh … let me clarify … one of my favorite cynical topics. I view the fact that there are these bullshit slinging presenters and trend watchers prognosticator wannabes, who call themselves ‘Futurists’, who make an amazing living off of sound bite thoughts quite cynically <and even slightly dismissively>.

Do I begrudge them the ability to find a sound bite? Nope.

What I do have a grudge against is that I, and many other people, then have to invest an inordinate amount of energy explaining to people that the sound bite is just that … a sound bite … a simplistic meaningless irrelevant concept in the real world. We have to spend gobs of energy explaining why the ‘future speculation’ isn’t even speculation but rather as likely as a herd of unicorns coming over the horizon.

And then I found a book with someone who apparently has the same cynical attitude with regard to these ‘trend spotters.’ <note: I wish I had written this book>

So.

The Futurist. In case you don’t want to read this well written quasi-fun, quasi-cynical fictional look at the “buzz creator” future trends world, here is nutshell look at these pop-culture bullshit artists using the opening speech at the Futureworld conference <a fictional conference> by JP Yates <a fictional person/futurist> in the book:

————-

I realized this morning over breakfast that I’ve spent a good portion of my life seeking the approval of people I can’t stand.

Including myself.

The truth is, I know nothing. Understand nothing.

I try. I am not lazy. But the more I try to understand something the more intertwined and complex it seems. The more I realize I am out of the proverbial loop. The literal loop. The existential loop. The more I think of things the more I question whether anyone is properly looped. In fact, I challenge the very existence of the loop, proverbial, literal or metaphorical. So this is a fundamental problem, being out of a loop that I don’t even believe in.

Most books or movies or creation myths have a hero who knows all there is to know about at least one thing. And he uses that gift to overcome an obvious and blatant evil adversary. He has insider knowledge. Special gifts. Ingenious ways of getting to the core of things. The answer. The solution. The truth. He knows what’s right and wrong. He knows what’s next. And he knows what to do about it.

I don’t.

I don’t understand the present let alone the fucking future.

Yet we claim to understand. Pretend to. Some actually believe it, that they do know. You know the people. The ones who talk about such things with such cocksure passion that you think, shit, maybe they do know, maybe they really do. They speak in absolutes. Blacks and whites. They speak with soothing partisan simplicity. They speak with their hands and use Powerpoint like a sword. They quote people you ought to know more about. They work on a privileged higher plane and posit their views with a condescending subterranean confidence, convincing you not to worry, that forces are at work on other levels, levels that simple folks like us cannot even begin to fathom, so it’s best not to worry your pretty little head about it and trust them, the experts, that this is the way it is. And the way it will be.

People get rich and powerful operating this way, perpetuating the myth of the uber level, the exclusive loop. Dispensing their wisdom and opinions and edicts to the masses. Breaking down the conflicting moral, political and economic issues of 52 billion people into a binary proposition. Yes or no. War or peace. Good or bad. With us or against us. Ginger or Mary Ann.

Presidents work on this level. And dictators. Talk show hosts. Professional wrestlers. Actresses on the steps of the capitol. Conservatives. Liberals. The members of VFW Post #442. CEOs. Madison Avenue. Wall street. Sesame Street.

They’re all in the loop. All working on another level.

I’m not.

I don’t believe in the scared loop or the secret level.

In fact, I think the more people claim to absolutely know, the more clueless and insecure thery absolutely are. Of course, I can’t be sure of this.

Which brings me to us. And to me. Who do we think we are? Who did I think I was?

How can I call myself a futurist when I missed the most cataclysmic event of our time? How can I predict tomorrow when the world is on fire today?

How did I see reality TV coming but miss this?

And let’s be honest: we all did.

We make all these pronouncements but none of us ever goes back to check on their accuracy. Shit, if the people in this room were right just 1 percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in a pill form, and having literal sex with our virtual selves. But if you talk shit long enough, sooner or later you may actually be right, and if by some fluke that is the case, watch out, because any successful prediction is always followed by the cannibalistic scramble for credit – the blood grab to brand an original thought as your own.

We all want to be the first to be there to identify a “click moment”, but we live in a world that may never click again.

We’re great at telling people the future they need to buy into instead of the present they should be making the most of.

And what’s hilarious is that we all believe it. That we are geniuses. That we are all responsible for and deserving of our wealth. More deserving of the privileged life than, say, a teacher or a mason. A cleric or a hot dog vendor. Despite the fact that 99% of us did not create our good fortune. The markets did. Or luck. Or heredity.

I believed it.

But not anymore.

You see, we may be able to identify cool, but we can never invent it. Cool is never manufactured. You never try to be cool. It happens.

Same goes for goodness. And truth.

And the only truth I know …is that I know nothing. And even though you may dress the part – the missoni scarves, the yellow jumpsuits, the tiny glasses, the all-whites, the all-blacks, the Nehru’s, the sandals, the glittering gadgets – none of you know anything either. Sorry about that.

We are not innovators. We are fucking abominations.

To paraphrase someone smarter than me, who still knows nothing, the philosophical task of our age is for each of us to decide what it means to be a successful human being.

I don’t know the answer to that, but I would like to find out.

In the meantime, I know absolutely zilch.

I am the founding father of the Coalition of Clueless.

————-

Ok.

Beyond the ‘coalition of clueless what captured my feelings about so-called Futurists is this:

“We are not innovators, we are fucking abominations.”

Cynical?

Sure.

Have I felt this listening, or reading, to some of the popular trend spotter ‘gurus’? You betcha.

Do I wish I had written this? Absofuckinglutely.

This book led me on my merry way in it’s Futurist bashing in a way reminiscent of Joseph Heller (Good as Gold and maybe a business version of Catch-22).

I think the whole Futurist label is bullshit. A ‘futurist’ is one of those nifty bullshit words the business world uses for those pop psychologists who identify trends and recognizers of ‘future cool.’

And the book permitted me a glimpse into why I could have never been a successful ‘futurist’ … well … beyond the fact I suck at identifying meaningful trends of course … and that is futurists need to be blindingly optimistic with regard to prosperity … and I would be screwed because I am too pragmatic.

That said.

If you are a cynical pragmatist like me and you care about this topic you will love this book. Each chapter has a paragraph summary of former achievements of the protagonist/Futurist.

Like:

“He once spoke before the graduates of a Bible college in Virginia about the future of God and one week later delivered the keynote address to the Adult Video Distributors Conference in Vegas about the future of porn, and received standing ovations at both.”

<awesome … and real life practical truth>

Another.

“He used to believe that things were getting better. He thought that science had a heart and that progress had a conscience. Then came doubts, followed by questions and alarming insights. Soon this high-profile, big-ticket trend prognosticator was prophesying doom and gloom.

He began to criticize the present, and he warned of a more damaged tomorrow if we refused to change. He gave heads-ups and watch-outs, supported by facts and scientifically validated forecasts and cautionary tales.

But this kind of outlook left his audiences feeling troubled, which was not the desired effect. It was suggested that he might want to put a bit more of a smile back on his work. So he switched gears and began telling those audiences what they wanted to hear.”

That is a truth.

I guarantee it.

With all due respect to the names I will now use … Seth Godin, Faith Popcorn, Tipping Point guy … they are smart people with an ability to articulate old ideas in a fresh way so that they appear to be ‘future thinking.’ I love listening to them & scanning their articulations but they are not sharing unique ideas. They are simply <mostly … just to give some ideas the benefit of the doubt> taking other people’s ideas … or thoughts … or portions/fragments of thoughts … and re-presenting them not only with gusto but also in a slightly different sound bite <sic: somewhat bullshit for people to drool over> way to capture the interest of whomever they are writing to and for.

As the book said:

“The futurist was never cutting edge or far ahead of the curve. He was often only just a few minutes in front of the pack, or a couple seconds ahead of the global zeitgeist, or at least of the middle american one. It is rare, and a gift, to be able to see something was going to be big in a mainstream way months and sometimes years before your hipsters, your early adapters, your so called thought leaders embraced it.”

–

The Futurist

Look.

I understand that Futurists are trapped in between telling the truth of today and the hope of tomorrow. And I do not begrudge someone making a living selling some hope … but … once you begin making a living doing something like this at some point you reach a place where you have a choice of telling the truth or simply selling “possible hope.”

Hey.

I say that and I am clearly in the “possible hope” guy category.

The trap gets more difficult if you actually get something right.

Here is how it works.

Once you get one big thing right people will tend to forget all the previous things you got so very wrong. Even better?

Sometimes the evangelical following will then step up and try to find ways to make all the wrong prognostications, past present and future, seem right.

The book protagonist tells his fellow experts, “If the people in this room were right just 1 percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in pill form and having literal sex with our virtual selves.”

So.

The truth of a trend spotter or a ‘futurist’ is that they steal <reassemble> the thoughts of others and repurpose them for slightly different purposes under the guise of ‘recognizing disparate facts that impact the bigger picture.’ Once again … I do not begrudge them. That takes a skill.

In addition they also benefit from the fact that in this world it becomes acceptable to not to know the answers to the questions that the world asks every second of the day. It’s okay to not know what you want, where you want to go and who you want to become.

It’s okay to wonder.

It’s okay to question and ask.

And it is okay to not to know<although those listening then take it as gospel>.

And what’s not okay is to stop wondering. So the Futurist steps in and uses all of those to create a made up future world everyone can think about.

Ok.

All that said.

Here is a truth <and Futurists clearly understand this>. The people they are talking to don’t really want wisdom.

Those people just want shortcuts to getting more. Therefore if the message doesn’t match the ‘more’ desires ultimately it doesn’t engage the listeners because it doesn’t contain the inevitability of something positive.

It may sound cynical but nowadays a message needs a sense of some guarantee that prosperity will never end <that is a thought from the book>. And therein lies my biggest issue <and my love for the Futurist book> … the fact that trend watchers are seeking future prosperity versus discussing empowering present prosperity.

That “seek future vs. empower present” is a big topic and I really want to simply suggest that everyone read The Futurist if you have any thoughts on this type of thing <although I have a separate post coming up where I use a fabulous quote from a really smart guy who suggests if we spent the same amount of time on present thinking as we do on future thinking our present, and future, would be a shitload better>.

Oh.

And … back to the ‘what do I mean about using old/other people’s ideas?’

Futurist is an old term.

The “Manifesto of Futurism,” written by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti was published on the front page of the French newspaper Le Figaro on February 20, 1909. it proclaimed the desire of the author, and his fellow Futurists, to abandon the past and embrace the future.

The point here on the whole concept of a “Futurist” is that their very existence is disdainful of the present. It suggests at its core there is something wrong with the present and the present should be discarded for something yet to be done in the future. Personally I hate that thought.

I like to firmly place one foot in the present and one foot in the future and go do great things.

Anyway.

Should we have an eye to the future? Absolutely.

To not do so is to remain stagnant with regard to thinking.

Should we ignore the present? Absolutely not.

If there was ever a time that a Futurist discussed the present … now would be the time. But i imagine a Futurist wouldn’t earn a shitloads of money or sell a lot of books if the said something like “the Future is in the now.”

It is an excellent book if you like this kind of stuff. It is cynical enough to make you ponder some of the mumbo jumbo you have probably absorbed over the past years. And I guess, in my mind, that is a good enough reason to read the book.

Up to a point a man’s life is shaped by environment, heredity, and the movements and changes in the world around him. Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be. Only the weak blame parents, their race, their times, lack of good fortune, or the quirks of fate.

Everyone has it within his power to say, ‘This I am today; that I will be tomorrow.’

The wish, however, must be implemented by deeds.”

–

Louis Lamour

===============

So.

I have written about self esteem and self image and living life. Until now I have never found a quote that summarizes a belief I have always had lurking in the back of my head.

And I found it from Louis Lamour, best known for his western writing (The Sacketts being the longest series), but what about this thought:

“Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be.”

How awesome is that? (pretty awesome)

It is absolutely true that a lot of what may hold us back from our dreams, or maybe more importantly, being whatever it is we want to be … isn’t our fault <or in our control>. Life throws a shitload of shit at us. It would be foolish to not recognize that.

But.

The days when nothing seems to go right.

The days where dreams seemed to have vanished.

The days where ‘not drowning’ is the focus instead of ‘swimming.’

All those days are gonna happen.

To all of us.

And it is on these days where it becomes really really easy to focus on excuses. But. We do have power to shape our tomorrows. Ignore the excuses and recognize that even if circumstances make things difficult … well… improving things is NOT impossible.

Sure.

Sometimes a little ingenuity is required. Sometimes you almost have to trick circumstances. Sometimes you have to zig when Life zags and sometimes you have to take some risks and get a little lucky.

Which leads me to that fucking beautifully written statement which I use over and over ad over again:

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

Absolutely … most people underestimate what they can do today.

Absolutely … most people over estimate what they can do tomorrow.

Despite that … it still comes down to two things: action and objectives.

Actions.

What I am tomorrow depends on what I do today.

My actions today make me who I am tomorrow. You get it.
This is all about first step, baby. Takin’ that first step. You constantly hear “I’ll do it tomorrow”. And when it doesn’t happen tomorrow, it becomes the next tomorrow and the next and …. well … you get it (and I will explain why under objectives).

But.

While you hear that … what is actually the truth?

What do people really do? (and you just may not always see it)

Here is the truth behind actions and this thought. Yup. The truth.

People who decide mentally to “do something” actually … well … do something. No shit. They do take action. They do begin to “shape the clay of their life to become what they want to be.” They … well … do.

Then what is the problem?

Objectives.

As in when we try to meeting the sometimes farcical absurd expectations in the mind. That said. Let me take a minute on ‘objectives.’ When writing about this quote I happened across this young university student named Scott H Young who wrote something on this topic.

Now.

I will admit. He lost me somewhere in the middle of his thinking but, regardless, he offers a nifty concept called “velocity based thinking (or goal setting).” I didn’t want to steal his idea but rather simply share it here. This isn’t the entire thinking just a highlight to make a point:

—————————

How is it possible to balance living in each moment and the concept of personal growth and improvement? Doesn’t personal development imply a certain dissatisfaction with where you are in life? At the very least, doesn’t an obsession with personal growth indicate that you are constantly living in the future, rather than enjoying each moment? How can we remove this apparent dichotomy and get the improvement we desire along with satisfaction now? In other words, how can we live for today and still strive for tomorrow?

The old position based paradigm told us to focus on where we are in life. If we have a big house, a nice family and are in good health, then we can be happy. If we are poor, miserable and alone then we are depressed. Pretty simple. In this paradigm, our main focus is on our current position.

Some take this position based thinking to a slightly higher level when they don’t think about where they are but where they are going. Instead these people draw their level of happiness from the position they feel they will be in the future. Although this is an improvement, the cost of being unsatisfied with today is simply too high a price to pay for this paradigm.

There is an alternative paradigm, however. This is a velocity based paradigm. In this paradigm, where you are doesn’t matter. It doesn’t even matter where you are going to end up. From this perspective, our focus not where we are going, but rather, the rate we are getting there. This perspective tells us that being homeless or a millionaire makes no difference. It is only the rate at which they are improving that distinguishes them.

The major distinction between a velocity based goal and a position based one is mostly in how you view the goal. Positional goals are usually viewed as a means to achieve something. If I set a goal to lose x pounds in three months, then what I am pursuing is the goal itself. Velocity based goals take a completely different approach. The purpose of a velocity based goal is to serve to direct, focus and amplify the growth you are experiencing right now.

Imagine life is like climbing an infinitely large cliff side. Positional thinking tells you to try and get as high up the cliff as you can. Positional goals are used to reach new plateaus on the cliff. Velocity based thinking tells us that getting really high up on the cliff is irrelevant given its infinite nature. Instead velocity based thinking tells us that the true experience of life has to come from the rate at which we are climbing the cliff. Sitting at one notch of the cliff for too long is boring and unsatisfying regardless of your height. Velocity based goals in this sense are not used to reach the plateaus themselves, these goals are used to encourage, push and measure the rate at which you are climbing.

The key difference between positional goals and velocity based goals is simple. If you fail to achieve a positional goal, this is usually very demotivating. This is often why so many new goal setters fail to continue with the practice. The pain of failing to achieve when you’ve tried your best is often too great. Velocity based goals remove this problem entirely. Because the goal was simply a servant of directing and pushing your own growth, as long as you know you were trying your best (maximum velocity possible) then the goal was successful regardless of whether you underestimated the deadline necessary.

A velocity based paradigm is actually far more effective in improving our position.

The reason is actually rather simple. Positional based thinking is built on the notion of competition. As a result, we strive to make leaps ahead in our position based on where we are compared to others. If we are on the top then we slow down, for what is the point of trying really hard when you are already in the lead? If we are on the bottom, negativity and pessimism often cripple our growth. Position based thinkers tend to only achieve a maximum velocity when they feel they need to increase their position, yet that positional increase is achievable. Velocity based thinking doesn’t have this weakness. People who truly live this ideal are at a maximal velocity all of the time. Being at the top or bottom holds no distinction to these people. Rich or poor, strong or weak, healthy or ill these people are always traveling at a speed which is the most they can possibly achieve.

—————————-

Okay. That is the theory.

What I like about this velocity idea? It isn’t about frickin’ milestones and moving up the ladder and crap like that. It is about movement. And movement at your own pace. Not in competition but rather just with a goal of improving personal being. Judging yourself against … well … yourself I guess.

And with that I get to complete the circle on this quote and thought.

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

The only really important word L’Amour uses throughout this thought is “I.”

It’s not about competition.

It’s not about goals and objectives.

It is about I. And what “I” wants <or needs>.

That said.

Life is tough enough without having to have someone else tell you how to ‘progress’ personally. Go your own speed. Fuck what anyone says. Sure. Becoming who you want to be “tomorrow” takes lots and lots of work. But. Go your own velocity.

Anyhow.

I love this quote.

Love it mostly because I like the way it gives the truth instead of some pithy inspirational flippant quote.

This I am today, that I will be tomorrow. If I didn’t have “lover’s quarrel with the world” as my mantra this would be it.

Knowledge of Botany: Variable. Well up in belladonna, opium, and poisons generally. Knows nothing of practical gardening.

Knowledge of Geology: Practical but limited. Tells at a glance different soils from each other. After walks has shown me splashes upon his trousers, and told me by their colour and consistence in what part of London he had received them.

Knowledge of Chemistry: Profound.

Knowledge of Anatomy: Accurate but unsystematic.

Knowledge of Sensational Literature: Immense. He appears to know every detail of every horror perpetrated in the century.

Plays the violin well.

Is an expert singlestick player, boxer, and swordsman.

Has a good practical knowledge of British law.”

―

Arthur Conan Doyle <A Study in Scarlet>

==================

So.

I am not sure if it is that I am of an age where my experiences have become varied enough that I chafe on being slotted in some form of ‘what you do’ or if I am of an age where many of the people I know get frustrated that they are demanded to define themselves, careerwise, in some simplistic way.

All that said.

I found myself in an odd alternative universe writing a core “here is why I have created this site and initiative” for someone I respect … and it was written for him but easily expressed my own situation.

After I sent him what I had scribbled I went back and I replaced his field with mine and … well … I found I was writing about my frustrations were which his … as well as a number of people I know:

====================

This site is borne of my frustration with explaining I am more than an advertising guy.

This site is borne of a belief that there is a community of advertising guys/gals who not only know they are more than advertising people but they also know they would like to use the skills they have in a business world which they see as needing what they have to offer.

This site is borne of what I know to be true – many of us are not simply advertising people, we are tinkers, tailors, soldiers & spies … all in one.

For some of us it gets frustrating to explain just because I have my MBA and am an experienced advertising guy that I am more than just that.

I get frustrated when my degree defines me.

I get frustrated when my industry experience label defines what my skills are.

I get frustrated that what I do, or have tangibly done, defines what I am capable of.

I get frustrated because I know how to ask the hard questions which often offer the hardest answers – the right things to do <which I believe businesses are desperate for this skill>.

I get frustrated because I know that “the truth is” is rarely the truth and I know that truths are often misty and multiple, like ghosts.

I get frustrated because I know all that I just wrote is a reflection of a thinking skill, a problem solving skill, a business skill and not just an advertising skill.

I get frustrated because I am more than an advertising guy and I know many people are frustrated by being slotted so simplistically.

To me, the world is too quick to define people and their skills in a simplistic way — simplistically by what they do <on the surface> and what specific skills they have acquired. People are often more complex than the labels they carry along with them and skills are often more translatable, with surprisingly positive outcomes, than many people are willing to think about.

It is our own fault because we have bludgeoned it into everyone’s head that everyone has to be a specialist or have some specific skill and, therefore, if you cannot simply define your specialty or skill you are … well … of less worth than someone who can.

That is, frankly, silly if not ludicrous.

Here is what I know.

I am more than an advertising guy. I am a tinker, tailor soldier and spy.

And I am building a community of likeminded people with a desire to go beyond simply being defined by the degree they earned and what labels people put on them to reach out into a business world, which may not know they need our skills at the moment, and show them there is a group of overlooked people who have skills to offer which businesses can benefit from.

============

tin·ker

ˈtiNGkər/

noun: tinker; plural noun: tinkers

1.

(especially in former times) a person who travels from place to place mending metal utensils as a way of making a living.

a person who makes minor mechanical repairs, especially on a variety of appliances and apparatuses, usually for a living.

2.

an act of attempting to repair something.

tai·lor

ˈtālər/

noun: tailor; plural noun: tailors

1.

a person whose occupation is making fitted clothes such as suits, pants, and jackets to fit individual customers.

Soldier

Noun

A soldier is one who fights as part of an organised, land based, sea based and air based armed force.

spy

spī/

noun: spy; plural noun: spies

1.

a person who secretly collects and reports information on the activities, movements, and plans of an enemy or competitor.

=============

Sigh.

I am fairly sure I am not in the majority in that the bulk of the world tends to acquire specific skills but I do believe the majority of generalists get unfairly squeezed into some incredibly uncomfortable boxes simply because the world just doesn’t seem to believe a generalist has the same value as a specialist.

It is frustrating.

To be clear … a qualified generalist doesn’t claim to be able to do everything.

I am not qualified to be a CFO <although I understand what CFOs do and what they say>.

I am not qualified to be some social media strategist <although I understand what they do and what they say>.

I am not qualified to … well … you get the point.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about effective marketing, advertising and communications in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about effective company vision, objectives, strategies and how to grow sales & retention in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to talk about positioning products & services, behavioral economics, the emotional & functional reasons people do things as well as using those things in making the hard business decisions which guide businesses toward success in any industry <even if I have never worked specifically in that industry>.

But from a generalist perspective I am qualified to dabble in almost any topic in any industry on any issue and use that ‘dabbling’ to make some relevant points based on some seemingly disparate type knowledge.

===============

“You know about fixing cars, you’re athletic, and you know when to shut up.”

Any person in a managerial position, from supervisor to president, who feels that his employee is basically not as good as he is and who suspects his employee is always trying to put something over on him, lacks the necessary qualities for human leadership – to say nothing of human friendship.”

—–

Harry Humphreys

============

“The conventional definition of management is getting work done through people, but real management is developing people through work.”

—-

Agha Abedi

=============

Well.

Leading and managing people is possibly one of the most rewarding things you can do in a business career.

Firing people is possibly one of the most unrewarding things you can do in a business career.

Unfortunately these two things are inextricably linked.

I could argue that once you assume responsibility for firing someone … you learn more about yourself, and I imagine others learn about you, than from almost any other responsibility you assume as a leader.

No one likes firing people. Well. No one who is any good at business leadership. I don’t care if you absolutely hate the person you are firing, if the person has actually committed a fireable offense and you are in the right to fire them, or even if you fire someone for good reason … suffice it to say … it never feels good to fire someone.

And because of that … a good business leader never delegates the tough termination. And they never send someone to terminate a direct report.

Generally speaking … you fire anyone who is a direct report, or you were directly responsive for hiring, face to face.

Yeah.

This may not be, logistically, the easiest thing to do but it is part of the burden of responsibility. It is the mantle you wear and it is what you are obligated to offer the person being terminated – dignity & respect.

Anything less than that and you are shirking your responsibility. Anything less than that is … well … chicken shit. And you are a chickenshit business leader if you do not do these things.

Sure.

What I just shared is a hard lesson but one business people learn in young management.

I will never forget the first person I ever fired. Paul.

An absolute great guy in absolutely the wrong position and possibly career. But that doesn’t mean it was easy to terminate him. While I was 99% sure it was the right thing to do <and my boss and her bosses agreed> there was an extraordinarily loud 1% in my head that kept me awake that night.

Inevitably he chose a different career and went on to become an SVP of sales.

And he was kind enough to drop me a couple of notes to tell me it all worked out for the best.

But I will never forget firing him. I can honestly say I never forget anyone I have fired <and that is a semi-long list after years of management>.

However.

I would like to think my leadership career is measured more by the people I did not fire.

Not firing, in a larger organization, can be harder than you think.

I think I spent more time explaining to the most senior people why I would not fire some of the people I managed than I did ever discussing almost anything else about employees with them.

Well. That is … it felt that way.

The crap that floats upwards into senior leadership about individual employees is amazing. The littlest mistakes and quirks seem to take on exponential size when it arrives at the most senior people — and they do not hesitate to share their disproportional views.

Regardless. All of those views cut into the ‘trust belief’ … are they respected within the organization, do they have the trust of the organization and can they be trusted with their responsibility.

And that is when you earn your stripes as a manager. You do not cave in to the ‘easy thing to do’ but rather stand up for your people and let the chips fall as they may. Oh. And you learn it is totally worth it to not take the easy way out.

Let me be clear.

No one is perfect. I was not a perfect employee nor was a perfect manager. And, yet, when judging employees there sometimes is the ‘perfect measure’ of which becomes the absurd standard.

Yes.

We should judge senior people more critically but we should judge them fairly.

Anyway.

I didn’t fire a lot of people. And I can think of at least 4 who made me incredibly proud that I didn’t … despite some pressure from others to do so.

All 4 of these have sent me notes at different points, not thanking me for not firing them but rather for simply giving them a chance, believing in them and seeing something in them that they knew <because all employees know when they are under ‘the human resources microscope’> many others didn’t.

All 4 of them have been professionally successful and, more importantly, are solid good human beings. Neither of those are because I didn’t fire them but rather vindicate the non-firing decision.

All that said.

Firing someone, despite the pain of actually doing it, is often the easy way out and is certainly a way to avoid looking at your own flaws.

Flaws? I sometimes believe one of the hardest things you can learn in your career is that your best is not particularly special.

Learning the fact that your talent, in reality, is matched by a shitload of people.

Learning that your best is relatively easily matched by a shitload of people.

It is an unfortunate truth that:

Talent is talent.

Smarts are smarts.

And expertise is almost always relative.

At any given point in Life and your career you can look around you and, if you are self aware, you will note you are rarely the most talented, rarely the smartest one in the room and rarely the only expert.

Even on your best day you may not actually be the best.

I imagine that is a tough thing to get your head wrapped around.

But I also imagine if you do wrap your head around it evaluating employees and how you fire them is affected.

I always watch how someone terminates an employee.

You can learn a lot about people in that situation … and you can learn a shitload about how someone feels about dignity, respect and responsibility in how they terminate an employee.

===========

Postscript 1: under the general heading of “chickenshit” from a business perspective I will comment on a Trump firing:

There are hundreds of different viable reasons to fire someone and if you have the responsibility to hire & fire and it is ‘at will’ you can do what you want. But HOWTrump fired James Comey was chickenshit.

It wasn’t face to face with a direct report <or even face to face with anyone … just a letter delivered by a non-government employee>.

While there appeared to be no sense of urgency to terminate the action was taken with an absurd sense of senseless urgency which permitted Comey the indignity of being blindsided, in the middle of a commitment to the people who reported to him and not even in town.

This was a chicken shit way of terminating an honorable employee. It is indicative of Trump’s lack of character.

Postscript 2: Under the general heading of “this is some crazy shit” from a business perspective:

Firing someone for lack of confidence when the people who you are actually working for have a general lack of confidence in you is slightly surreal.

This may actually be the ironic point of this little postscript rant.

The stated “Donald J Trump fired his FBI Director because of ‘lack of confidence’ is … well … crazy shit.

Well. If that is a true criteria and I were to look at some national polling data I could argue Trump could be fired on the same criteria by the American people.

Most leaders do not defend their firing decision through childish name calling.

“Crying Chuck” .. “Richie” in quotes <instead of Richard>. Calling people diminishing names. Childish crap like that. I have been criticized as a leader for people I have fired, as well as people who I didn’t fire, and when appropriate I responded with some “why I did it” information but I never deflected my choice & decision onto others by suggesting they were not qualified to criticize … and I certainly always treated peers with a modicum of respect.

I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in a business meeting, often with very smart business people, and someone pulls out <verbally> some marketing, or any business principle, process/idea/way-to-think from … well … over a decade ago.

Uhm.

Some times, often, from even longer back.

As I sit there and listen … well … I feel like I have swallowed a cloudy sky.

<note: it feels a little uncomfortable>

It’s not that the old idea or thinking is wrong … it has just been improved upon.

By a ‘version’ I imagine I am thinking it is maybe more unbundling and shedding some of the outdated features and learning some of the newer features rather than simply unlearning something.

I fully understand that most business people are under constant pressure to learn more and to learn quickly and to mostly focus on the shit that is most important to them. Therefore they will also tend to absorb one of their ‘non expertise competencies’ in the most simple sensible fashion possible.

But here is the issue in today’s business world.

The future belongs to the people who can unlearn stuff faster than the rest.

I did that because it is almost impossible to learn something new until you have created some mental space by letting go of something else.

So I am suggesting a ‘you cannot do that <adapt> unless you learn how to do this <unlearn>.’

You either learn to unlearn quicker … on everything … not just your core competency … or … well … you will either be too slow <because that one part is like dragging algae on the bottom of a sailboat> or you will fail <because even that one part can blow up the entire engine>.

I know.

I know.

What I am suggesting is hard.

REALLY hard.

Because, as I noted earlier on many of these things are still solidly sensible, sometimes this means letting go of something that has worked really well for you for a long time.

Now.

To be clear.

I do not think that just because something is an ‘older idea’ that it is not usable.

In fact I believe we have shed more good thinking under the guise of some bullshit ‘pop business culture’ soundbite type thinking than is good for us.

But there are aspects of old ideas that can be updated.

I don’t suggest this simply or flippantly … I do so because I see the value of new thinking but from a more practical aspect – the business world has changed in some dynamics that should make us not simply reapply a slightly tired business thinking protocol.

The business world is demanding us to ‘think new faster.’

Most simply … a business life has become even more fragile than ever before.

A Yale professor recently stated that the average lifespan of a company listed in the S&P 500 index of leading US companies has decreased by more than 50 years in the last century. <67 years in 1920s to 15 years today>. He also suggests that by 2020 more than ¾ of the S&P 500 will be companies that either do not exist today or are below our current awareness radar.

Relevancy is the name of the game. Which means adaptability is key because … well … what used to work … doesn’t now … and what works today … will most likely not work in the near future.

Old business models and old business thinking is being shaken to the core. And it is not just because of ‘old people.’

You store away thoughts in your head and prioritize what you just use, and reuse, and what you unlearn and what you learn anew.

Look.

I know I still hear people quote ‘good to great’ tripe <when I wish more people would pull out Covey’s ‘Habits of’ instead>.

I know I was just in a meeting where an incredibly smart person discussed the traditional purchase funnel <see image to left> and he was kind enough to chuckle when I pointed out that model type thinking had solid aspects but there were significantly newer models which reflect the dynamics of today’s word better.

I guess I need to remind myself a couple things:

I live, eat & breathe new thinking and new ways of doing things.

2. Most people do not.

This doesn’t mean I am better than anyone … it is just that I am always seeking the ‘right way to think in a particular situation’ rather than ‘best practice for all.’

And I am involved with such a wide variety of industries and business and business people that ‘one way does not fit all.’

But.

From their perspective … “I am in one business and I want one proven way.” I don’t blame them … it is just that I believe they are wrong.

Today’s business world is all about living in a non-stagnant world. Business has always been restless … it just seems more restless.

Stay still and get run over.

Something you learned in the past, which is logical & makes sense, seems counterintuitive to ‘unlearn’

Or … as John Maynard Keynes said:

—

“The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping the old ones”

—

We are all creatures of habit and custom ingrained by decades of repetition.

In addition.

Smart people have a tendency to hold on to sensible smart ideas.

Escaping old ideas is hard.

REALLY hard <especially if they were good>.

And sometimes seems counterintuitive to let go because … “I found something that works and I want to maintain it as long as I can.’

Sounds smart.

Sounds sensible.

Uhm.

Now hear the sound of your business getting crushed.

All that said.

What made me start writing this post?

An old friend of mine wrote the following words on his linkedin site … and I liked them <albeit I did find a typo … to his chagrin>.

It is about branding and advertising … but the concept behind the words ring true thru any business category:

===

I want to encourage our industry to evolve beyond the tired branding principles that haven’t changed since Oglivy made his bones over 30-years ago.

If you find yourself baffled by double-speak and special language that only brand experts seem to understand, trust your instincts and find a firm who is fast and whose counsel makes rational sense.

A client told me about his experience with one of the agencies in his stable:

“… it’s like talking to the Mandarins that keep all commoners from the Forbidden Palace … I don’t speak their language … the process takes too long … and I have other things to do ….”

Getting to the Forbidden Palace of Brand shouldn’t take three months and war chest of fees that would be better off in working media.

This, I know, will upset an industry cobbled together on pre-recession consulting contracts just to come up with a snappy line, color palette, and logo.

If you find yourself sitting in yet another meeting where somebody poses the question: “But who are we really, and who do we want to be when we grow up?”

Run.

You can shape your brand in less than four weeks. You and your company knows who they are and your consumers know who you are. The faster you come to leverage points and missed opportunities, the faster your retail or sales organization can get back to doing what they do best — SELLING.

You need to unleash a burlap sack of caffeinated ferrets into your marketing world to get things done, excite your organization, and make sales happen.

That’s where I come in … head caffeinated ferret at your service.

Mandarins need not apply.

===

Look.

I know it is difficult to stay in touch with the newest best thinking.

Shit.

Sometimes it is almost just as difficult to discern what is actually the newest best thinking <because there is so much shit dressed up as tasty flambé>.

But.

Tired business thinking principles are tired business thinking principles.

Sorry.

But it is what it is.

Thinking with fresh legs will pass tired thinking any day.

All I know is that, personally, every time I hear someone speak a tired business principle I feel like I have swallowed a cloudy sky.

“Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

–

H.L. Mencken

==============

So.

This is about standing up for what you believe in <not really about being a pirate>. This is about business. And, sometimes, I imagine some of my thoughts are also about Life.

In fact.

This is about several things:

– Not always being politically correct

– Possibly not ‘playing nice’

– Sacrificing some ‘art of compromise’

– Being a pirate <yeah … I lied … it is partially about being a pirate>

Alrighty. Before I get to the fun part <slitting throats> … let me tell you how this quote is about business. Because the quote suggests that everyone … even a normal <or quasi sensible> person … is tempted to become a pirate <raise the black flag> and kill <hopefully not literally> conformity, the status quo and those things that may dull the edges in business <and life>.

Now.

This isn’t about making being a pirate a living/career, or a way of life, but rather this is more about suggesting some situations in which you are tempted to pillage all that around you, take no prisoners and get it done your way. Ok. Maybe some situations where being ‘pirate-like’ can benefit you in business.

That said.

Here are the things to think about.

Not being politically correct

Hoisting the black flag in business means you are gonna say and do some things that well behaved polite business people just may not like. In fact … it even means going out on your own, hopefully not on the plank, and sailing independently outside the conformity of what is said to be ‘right.’

It is often a business truth that wading your way through all the politically correct steps takes time and can sap energy. Sometimes you gotta simply say “I am a pirate … my crew will look motley … and I am abrasive myself … but this ship is gonna sail today with all those who want to hoist the black flag.”

Now.

You cannot be politically incorrect all the time … that would make you a bigot, ignorant, an asshole … and/or simply stupid <in other words … a bad pirate>. However. Selectively avoiding correctness can cut through bullshit and get the ship out of the harbor.

Oh.

And put you in a position to win a prize. Or get sunk.

But that’s the risk a pirate runs.

Not playing nice.

Being a pirate in business isn’t like playing cricket <as the British would say>. Hoyle isn’t giving everyone the rules.

Pirates cared about one thing … okay … two things.

Booty <winning the prize>

Not dying.

Good pirates constantly balanced between the 2. This insured they didn’t do something so incredibly stupid that their <your> own throat wasn’t slit but also insured enough risk to get what you wanted.

It also meant rules were vague at best. I am not suggesting someone be immoral or so ruthless that the integrity of the organization is compromised.

But.

To win there is a loser. And pirates didn’t let the feelings of the loser affect how they played the game. They didn’t care about playing nice. They played to win, get some loot and not get killed. This kind of attitude threaded into how you approach business just ain’t a particularly bad thing.

Sacrificing the art of compromise.

Pirates don’t compromise. They cannot.

It is about winning on their terms or losing on their terms.

Why?

Because if they don’t win they hang.

So what does that mean?

Hang compromise out to dry. Sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do to win the battle. Uhm. Sometimes. This advice is a contextual ‘pick your battle’ thought.

I am not suggesting cheating.

I am not suggesting lying.

I am not suggesting anything nefarious.

I am simply suggesting that negotiating and compromising may need to be sacrificed <on occasion> in order to do what is right. And sometimes it is a truth that there is a better, if not actually best, way of doing something.

Slit the throats of compromise and do it ‘your way.’ It is kind of an all or nothing plan of action.

Oh.

Kind of like being a pirate.

Being a pirate.

No … I am not suggesting you get to wear the cool looking black eye patch or say “aargh matey” but this is about sailing the open seas, being swashbuckling and seeking booty <gold and jewels … not the other type>.

Let’s call it … well … maybe independence. And gathering those around you who want to sail off alone just this once <at least>.

Great leaders are often like the great frigate captains of the old British navy <who were kind of like pirates within a larger organization>. They showcased an ability to effectively participate in the larger organizational activities when required … and an ability to be effective taking off on independent campaigns.

Oh.

And choosing when to be independent. No one can be a pirate 100% of the time <I don’t remember reading of many old pirates> but being a pirate every once in a while can be healthy <and fun and productive>. Individually as well as to a business and organization.

Ok.

All that said. To be clear … H.L. Mencken was an extremely cynical person, disgusted with conformity, and firm in the belief that the majority opinion was pretty much always wrong. He also tended to believe the status quo <customs and traditions > was pretty much always silly if not stupid.

I don’t agree.

Selectively … all of those things are healthy.

If you are a pirate as a standard operating procedure … you are simply an outcast <if not a bitter contrarian>. I tend to believe the type of pirate I am discussing <not a greed driven corporate blood sucking leech> is needed in today’s business world more than ever. Organizations do not encourage individuality and controlled conformity <under the guise of ‘team’> is the typical guiding principle. Boring and stagnant. That’s what I think of when I read what I just wrote.

Lastly.

While I don’t recommend being a pirate and hoisting the flag all the time … I guess I would like to remind everyone that Life is awful short … and you either have to have some fun <in business> or you have to stand up for something at some point or you are just marking time. Being a pirate now and then can remind you that individuality, or non conformity, can define you to yourself a little. It can provide some personal clarity.

Something I think we could all use a dose of on occasion.

Anyway.

I can guarantee only one thing … if you hoist the black flag at least once you will certainly have one memorable moment. Oh. And you get to be a pirate for at least one moment.

It ministers to some great need, it performs some great service, not for itself, but for others…or failing therein, it ceases to be profitable and ceases to exist.”

–

Calvin Coolidge

==================

“Let’s be honest. There’s not a business anywhere that is without problems. Business is complicated and imperfect. Every business everywhere is staffed with imperfect human beings and exists by providing a product or service to other imperfect human beings.”

–

Bob Parsons

=========================

On Bastille Day it seems appropriate to take a minute and discuss “fraternite” in business.

Yeah.

Today is the French National Day, the 14th of July, or … le 14 juillet.

By the way … nobody in France calls it Bastille Day <that is a creation of the American mind>. The French are celebrating what is called Fête de la Fédération <the National Celebration> and commonly Le quatorze juillet <the fourteenth of July>. The national holiday is about national pride: the national bleu-blanc-rouge flag and the French values of Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité.

French for “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>” … the national motto of France

Regardless.

Inevitably a great organization exhibits both efficient AND effective progress.

What typically creates that combination is part discipline, part structure, part leadership … all glued together by “fraternité”.

That ‘glue’ is most often discussed in the American business world as ‘a vision’ or maybe ‘a purpose’. We do so because we Americans hate any kind of lack of specificity. But the truth is that the most common bond of a great organization is a more nebulous concept … one of “fraternité”.

Or.

“Any man aspires to liberty, to equality, but he cannot achieve it without the assistance of other men, without fraternity.”

(Napoleon)

Oddly enough, while this sounds relatively common sense, I kind of feel like business itself needs a revolution to overturn the current thinking to accommodate what should be common sense.

What do I mean?

Current business is kind of in a wacky spot.

It talks a lot about vision and purpose as if they are “things” … like maybe a lighthouse anyone can see as they bob around the chaotic sea of business life to find a way home.

By the way … I would argue that is a very individualistic thought — “I can find my way home” type thought – and not really a team thought <but that could quite easily be debated>.

Regardless.

Fraternity is more like “everyone not only knowing what they need to do to keep the ship afloat but actually pitching in whether needed or not because they love the ship itself.”

That may sound like some wacky nuance but I have to warn people that revolutions can kind of gain some momentum off of some fairly wacky things on occasion.

And, by the way, that is a more nebulous “I feel this way” aspect of organizational culture and, as noted many times, if it cannot be measured or indexed or scored … most older leaders into today’s business just don’t like that kind of shit.

Anyway.

Not to beat this metaphor to death but I do believe we need a semi-revolution in the way business organizations are created and run and managed.

I think we may need that revolution because “fraternité” just ain’t the way business is run as a core principle. And, yes, it should be viewed as a “core” principle because … uhm … when discipline falls apart, when structure falls apart, when leadership falls apart … what keeps you on the battlefield and fighting is … yeah … “fraternité.”

On a bigger organizational level I worry about how an idea like this is getting suffocated by generational issues <younger people desire something and older people think they know the best> and maybe an outcome-is-the-only-thing-that-matters versus a belief business should incorporate altruistic aspects.

Both of those conflicts are HUGE issues. Issues I have written about in 1200+ word thought pieces … individually.

I actually believe we need some revolutionary thinking on the latter mre than the former.

To me we have a bunch of people who look at business and turn away because … well … I fear that they only believe they can change the world through more altruistic pursuits and not traditional business.

And, yes, they are important and good pursuits … but from a larger perspective … business drives the world. Business makes shit that makes lives easier and healthier and impacts the home and life in ways that it is difficult to imagine let alone outline in a few words.

Somehow … someway … we need to insert the ‘believers of principles’ into the business world with all of their ambition and hope … and remind them – and empower them – that they can change the world.

That they can make the world a better place.

They can make society and people and lives better.

And they can do it in business … not just altruistic career opportunities.

And if we do that … and do that well … I tend o believe we will build more organizations driven at its core by a sense of “fraternité” rather than a bunch of documents setting out some guiding principles, vision and purpose which everyone says “okay … let’s do that.”

It is quite possible that I am talking about ‘the soul’ of an organization.

What I do know is that … well … read the following quote:

====================

“I have found no greater satisfaction than achieving success through honest dealing and strict adherence to the view that, for you to gain, those you deal with should gain as well.”

–

Alan Greenspan

===============================

I do believe we need to be drawing some lines in business. And I don’t mean company handbook type lines or even some well-crafted ‘lines’ in “how we conduct our business” or “who we are” but maybe they are more lines with regard to some unwritten principles.

I say that because when you can gather a group of people together who share a strong set of principles … well … they will walk straight into a hail of bullets to not only survive but to get good shit done.

==========

“Morality, like art, means drawing a line someplace.

–

Oscar Wilde

===========

Now.

Business absolutely makes dealing with your principles a constant struggle. It can kind of suffocate your principles in between the pragmatic aspects of getting shit done <discipline & structure> and the faux burden of some vision or grander purpose which “you know is important to us therefore it should be important to you.”

Frankly, when suffocated by these bookends you don’t have a lot of elbow room for any type of true, intangible, unsolicited camaraderie.

The fraternité is more forced than natural.

And when it is not natural it is not as strong.

Fraternité in business.

I believe we have forgotten this.

And while I do believe many of us have forgotten how to draw lines with regard to our principles I tend to believe business, in general, has simply decided to just draw lines <in a box in fact> and say “there you go” … there are your principles and rules for comraderie.

That is kind of whack.

Look.

I can honestly tell you that being a senior leader in a business and organization you like <you do not have to love> may be one of the greatest experiences anyone can ever have. And what makes that experience truly great is when you are fortunate enough to foster something intangible, something that really cannot be measured, and something which doesn’t earn you some performance bonus at the end of the year … it is when you stumble upon the sense of fraternité.

I am sure some organizational guru will send me a link to “steps to build a fraternité organization” and … well … good for them. I tend to believe this is one of those soul aspects, intangible things, that is created less by some “how to” guide or some formula and more by simple good intentions combined with some good discipline, construct and leadership.

This is what I thought about today, July 14th, as I thought about the national motto of France “liberty, equality, fraternity <brotherhood>”.

With that I imagine I should end with where I began … no enterprise can exist for itself alone. That is the foundation for … well … a fraternité organization.